Air Testing Lapse at N.M. Nuclear Waste Dump Blamed on Staff Vacancy

Regulators failed to collect air samples in the week following a radiation release at a New Mexico nuclear waste dump because of a vacancy in the office responsible for monitoring the site

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Laura Zuckerman

(Reuters) - State regulators failed to collect air samples in the week following a radiation release at a New Mexico nuclear waste dump because of a vacancy in the office responsible for monitoring the site at the time, a state official said on Friday.

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, where drums of plutonium-tainted refuse from government nuclear weapons laboratories are buried in caverns a half a mile deep, has been closed since Feb. 14, when unsafe radiation levels were detected at the site.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Preliminary findings from an investigation of the mishap suggests that at least one barrel of improperly packaged material underwent a chemical reaction underground that caused it to rupture.

The leak ranks as the worst accident at the U.S. Energy Department facility since it opened in southeastern New Mexico near the town of Carlsbad in 1999. The plant, the only facility of its kind in the United States, is run under contract for the government by Nuclear Energy Partnership LLC.

Plant managers initially denied that employees working above ground at the site had been affected but said later that 22 workers were exposed to radiation, though at low levels not considered harmful to their health.

Surface-air monitoring conducted beyond the site by facility managers and university researchers in the days after the accident showed detectable trace amounts of radiation apparently had drifted from the plant. But state and federal officials likewise said they believed those levels were too small to pose a threat to humans or the environment.

However, additional independent air sampling required of the state Environment Department was never conducted during the first week after the accident due to a staff vacancy at the agency's Carlsbad office, spokesman Jim Winchester said.

State sampling resumed a week after the radiation leak, said Susan Kamat, director of that office.

A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency review of air testing in February and March found discrepancies in recorded times and dates of sample collections, flawed calculation methods, conflicting data and missing documents. It also found the facility sometimes said air samples contained no detectable levels of radiation when measurable levels were present.

Plant spokesman Tim Runyon said the review included recommendations “which we will use to improve our program.”

Don Hancock, head of the watchdog group Southwest Research and Information Center, said the accident revealed gaps in oversight and safety that have yet to be addressed by regulators.

 

(Reporting by Laura Zuckerman in Salmon, Idaho; Editing by Steve Gorman and Eric Beech)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe